Re: Discussing additional milestones that could be adopted by the WG?
Eric Rosen <erosen@cisco.com> Mon, 29 November 2010 16:29 UTC
Return-Path: <erosen@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: l3vpn@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: l3vpn@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4C243A6C1E for <l3vpn@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 08:29:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qX2QLba4Ebap for <l3vpn@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 08:29:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com (rtp-iport-1.cisco.com [64.102.122.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE3593A6C19 for <l3vpn@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 08:29:12 -0800 (PST)
Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,276,1288569600"; d="scan'208";a="186928507"
Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com ([64.102.124.13]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 29 Nov 2010 16:30:22 +0000
Received: from erosen-linux.cisco.com (erosen-linux.cisco.com [161.44.70.34]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id oATGUMNq002889; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 16:30:22 GMT
Received: from erosen-linux (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by erosen-linux.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oATGULb3023769; Mon, 29 Nov 2010 11:30:21 -0500
To: Yakov Rekhter <yakov@juniper.net>
Subject: Re: Discussing additional milestones that could be adopted by the WG?
In-reply-to: Your message of Mon, 22 Nov 2010 10:21:47 -0800. <201011221821.oAMILlU93034@magenta.juniper.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 11:30:21 -0500
Message-ID: <23768.1291048221@erosen-linux>
From: Eric Rosen <erosen@cisco.com>
Cc: l3vpn@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: erosen@cisco.com
List-Id: <l3vpn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l3vpn>, <mailto:l3vpn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/l3vpn>
List-Post: <mailto:l3vpn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:l3vpn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l3vpn>, <mailto:l3vpn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 16:29:13 -0000
Yakov> The scope of work in support of mp2mp P-tunnels should be guided by Yakov> draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-considerations. That document was never intended as a guide to future work; certainly when it was adopted by the WG it was presented as establishing a particular set of features as mandatory; it was not presented as a restriction on future charter modifications. I do agree that any option that is mandated or recommended in that document is a valid topic for the WG to consider taking up. But I don't agree with the converse.
- Discussing additional milestones that could be ad… Ben Niven-Jenkins
- Re: Discussing additional milestones that could b… Eric Rosen
- RE: Discussing additional milestones that could b… NAPIERALA, MARIA H (ATTLABS)
- Re: Discussing additional milestones that could b… Ben Niven-Jenkins
- Re: Discussing additional milestones that could b… Yakov Rekhter
- Re: Discussing additional milestones that could b… Eric Rosen